What White v White Means for Farming Families: 25 Years On

Divorce is never easy, but for farming families, it brings unique challenges. Questions about inherited land, family businesses, and assets tied up in property often come to the surface. One of the most important cases to shape how these issues are handled is White v White, with the judgement’s 25-year anniversary on the 26th of October.

This landmark case, with farming at its core, changed the way the courts approach divorce settlements, and its lessons are still highly relevant and significant today.

Why Farming Divorces Are Different

If you’re part of a farming family, you may be wondering:

• Will I lose the family farm if I divorce?
• Does it matter if the farm was inherited?
• What if I’ve supported the farm but haven’t been the one “earning” the money?

These are real and pressing concerns. That’s why the White v White case continues to be so important.

The Case in Brief

Mr and Mrs White had been married for 33 years. They jointly owned one farm, while Mr White also inherited another from his father. Their total assets were worth £4.6 million.

At first, Mrs White was awarded just £800,000, around one-fifth of the assets, based on what the judge thought were “reasonable needs”. On appeal, she was awarded £1.5 million.

The House of Lords upheld this, confirming that fairness matters more than limiting settlements to that which the Court considered met the “reasonable needs”.

The Key Lessons of White v White

The case established principles that remain vital today:

Fairness, not just “needs”: Settlements should reflect fairness across all assets, not just the basics for survival.

Equality of roles: Homemaking and childcare are just as valuable as financial contributions.

Inherited wealth counts, but not always fully protected: Assets brought into a marriage, like family farms, are considered, but in long marriages, they may still be shared.

What This Means for You

If you are part of a farming family and facing divorce, here are some key points to keep in mind:

• Length of marriage matters: The longer the marriage, the more likely inherited or family-owned land will be shared.
• Your contribution counts: Even if you weren’t the one “earning,” your role in raising children or supporting the family business carries equal weight.
• Planning helps: Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements can provide clarity and reassurance, especially for families wanting to protect generational assets.

Common Questions We Hear

Will I automatically lose half of my farm in a divorce?
Not necessarily. The outcome depends on your circumstances, the length of marriage, and whether the farm was inherited or purchased.

Does it matter if only one spouse’s name is on the land title?
No. The courts look at fairness, not just ownership. Both financial and non-financial contributions are considered.

Can we protect the family farm against the impact of divorce?
Yes, having a pre-nuptial agreement or post-nuptial agreement, will influence the Court’s decision when considering ringfencing assets.

Why This Still Matters 25 Years Later

The farming community continues to face the same challenges the Whites did: land held for generations, assets tied up in businesses, and family contributions that don’t always show up on paper.

The principles from White v White mean that fairness and equality are at the heart of divorce settlements. But every case is unique, and specialist legal advice is essential.

How We Can Help

At Hegarty, we have extensive experience helping farming families navigate divorce and protect what matters most. Whether you’re concerned about inherited land, business continuity, or ensuring a fair settlement, our family law team is here to help with sensitivity and expertise.

Contact us today to arrange a confidential discussion about your situation.